Isn’t the US supposed to be over this now?

As stated above, for an Individual to be a candidate for the office of president of the United States, the candidate must meet the qualifications set forth in the United States Constitution and one of those qualifications is that the Candidate shall be a "natural born citizen" of the United States. As Barack Hussein Obama II is of the "mulatto" race, his status of citizenship is founded upon the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Before the [purported] ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the race of "Negro" or "mulatto" had no standing to be citizens of the United States under the United States Constitution.

What a charming reminder of the United States’ racist history and current strain of virulent racism.

The more these troglodytes emerge from their borrows and show themselves in the light of day the better. It is much better to know of the infection so one can muster counter measures rather than to have it fester without ones knowledge.

Frank Zappa put it perfectly: “I’m not black, but there are times I wish I could say I’m not white.”
This, for me, is one of those times. I don’t like sharing so much as a low-melanin level with this bozo.

It’s not the racism that sticks out (well, okay it is that too, but…) – it’s that it’s the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. What is there not to understand about the fact that that means that even if the Constitution would once have disbarred a ‘mulatto’ president, it has been amended so as to …

There’s an ongoing myth among the supporters of certain ideologies that the 14th amendment isn’t legitimate because the states which had joined the CSA didn’t ratify it. The problem is that they’d left the USA… I seem to recall a little war over the issue. Anyhow, the 14th was ratified by what remained of the victorious USA before the states which had seceeded were allowed back in. Really, if you want a say in how a country works you shouldn’t have tried to leave guys.

I think it’s important for people to see lunacy like this so that they realize how much of the objection to Obama is that he’s too brown. I keep hoping it will make at least a few face their own bigotry, but even a bright, shiny optimist like me has a difficult time maintaining that hope.

I talk to far too many people who, with a slightly distasteful look on their face say, “I don’t like Obama”; but when pressed for details, can’t say what policy or action of his they don’t like.

Don’t know why my linky at #12 goes to the middle of the thread -anyways, if you scroll up to the beginning the first commenter reveals these gems from the pen of Mr Epperly:

It appears that Lisa Murkowski has received the majority of votes cast, but there is a problem — Lisa Murkowski is not qualified for the Office of U.S. Senator as she is not a citizen of the United States under Article I of the Constitution for the United States.

Enclosed is a “Proclamation” declaring the political privileges of candidates to hold public offices of the United States. The “Proclamation” shows that U.S. Congress has never made provisions in the U.S. Constitution for women or non-white citizens to hold public offices.

This is the rhetoric of the sovereign citizen movement,one of the most far right conservative ideologies. The idea is that the 14th amendment created a second class of citizens that don’t have the same rights and powers as sovereign citizens (under the original Constitution). Among other things, only the 14th amendment citizens are bound to pay income taxes (Hovind’s ideas are very closely related to this movement), while they can’t hold office.

The most famous sovereign citizen is Jared Loughner (the one who shot Congresswoman Gifford). At the time he had a website plastered with the slogans and ideas typical of the movement, and these ideas were pointed to by the media (who generally didn’t recognize them in their context) as evidence that he was schizophrenic or otherwise mentally incompetent. I have a fear that the psychiatrists who are managing him now and keep saying his is incompetent might be hearing sovereign citizen talking points from a sane individual and interpreting them as psychotic rantings.

In any case it strokes me that these views are treasonous, and trying to depose the sitting president on these grounds certainly is.

I have a fear that the psychiatrists who are managing him now and keep saying his is incompetent might be hearing sovereign citizen talking points from a sane individual and interpreting them as psychotic rantings.

Dude, you all missed it! The guy filing the lawsuit is obviously a member of the “Sovereign Citizen” movement. They are a group of folks that range from kooky to downright terrifying. They tend to confine themselves to idiotic protests like not putting a license plate on their vehicle or paper terrorism such as filling bogus lawsuits such as the one mentioned above. But they also have had strange shootouts with the police, essentially over nothing, and have murdered government officials in some areas.

The “14th ammendment” B.S. is a dead giveaway. They believe that the government has created some sort of trust for each and every citizen that is worth a huge pile of money. And that they have then used that trust fund to essentially mortgage(or enslave) all of us to some shadowy foreign group. However, minorities are not legal citizens but rather were created citizens by the 14th ammendment and are hence different from regular citizens. Which is REALLY important to them becaue they believe regular citizens can actually tap into their particular trust fund established by the government. But, “14th ammendment citizens” cannot.

I have to admit I find their paranoid insanity fascinating and this bozo is just another offshoot. it is creepy and interesting subculture and well worth wasting several hours of your employers time to google.

This guy deserves to be dropped from cliffs higher than exist on this planet. Preferably one with zero atmosphere so there’s no air-resistance…with heated spikes at the bottom, coated with that goo from Alien that eats through spacefreighter hulls. THEN stuffed with the diseased zombie porcupine carcass. Not that it would matter by then.

The great Dwarves of Fairbanks were greedy, and the dug to deep and too far in the mines of Minto. In their desperate quest for what is nothing more than shiny peebles, they released an old ignorance. Behold! The ancient Epperly, with skin like snow and a mind like coal. For he has reek vengeance upon this world, as soon as he gets out of his mother’s basement.

News flash to Gordon Warren Epperly- Obama has been President for more than three years- bit late. I find it deeply distrubing that this person would think his abhorrent behavior would ever be found acceptable by the population at large.

Stay in Alaska Gordy, hopefully some polar bear angry over global warming will maul or maybe a black bear- that would be more fitting.

I have a fear that the psychiatrists who are managing him now and keep saying his is incompetent might be hearing sovereign citizen talking points from a sane individual and interpreting them as psychotic rantings. – helenaconstantine

Is it really possible for a sane individual to adopt the SCM ideology? I had a look at it after Loughner was said to be an adherent, and it seemed designed to make batshit run howling and gibbering from the room in jealous frustration. Exempli gratia: US citizens can avoid being liable for income tax by inserting a punctuation mark into their name.

I had blissfully forgoten the word “Mulatto” had even existed. I haven’t heard it since the 80’s and it came from someone who was old enough to certainly be dead by now. Even overt racists don’t use that word anymore.

Is even Epperly’s interpretation of history correct? Before the 14th Amendment, were free black people (and “mulattos”) not citizens of the United States? I’m pretty sure the Constitution does not mention race (except in the 15th Amendment).

It really doesn’t matter to these people. You can make all the arguments about the second ammendment being for a milita or whatever. These wackaloons are going to have guns so I am glad I have mine. If you don’t feel you need one, that’s your right too.

to No. 35.
The Dread Scott decision held that blacks couldn’t be citizens. In fact a number of Supreme Court decision ((The majority in the late 1850s were slave owners themselves) held that blacks could not be free and that slave catchers could go wherever in the northern states and kidnap free blacks. Those provisions were never implemented, but they were so outrageous, it tipped the Republican nomination and the election to Lincoln since no compromise (represented by the Democrat Douglas) seemed possible after that.

How sweet of them. They’re advocating for a Negro uprising! Isn’t that nice.

(What? Wasn’t the US founded on opposition to Taxation without Representation? The only logical answer to discovering that a large part of the populace is taxed without representation is of course to support them in overthrowing the government to form a more perfect Onion, for the people, by the people and of the people.)

Obama is the son of a white US citizen born in the US. He is half white. Laws concerning the race of one’s father or mother have not been in affect for over a hundred years. Even in the antebellum south the children of white women were favorably considered.

I notice that Texas and Alaska border on foreign parts. Maybe that affects some people.

There’s an ongoing myth among the supporters of certain ideologies that the 14th amendment isn’t legitimate because the states which had joined the CSA didn’t ratify it. The problem is that they’d left the USA… I seem to recall a little war over the issue. Anyhow, the 14th was ratified by what remained of the victorious USA before the states which had seceeded were allowed back in. Really, if you want a say in how a country works you shouldn’t have tried to leave guys.

I seem to recall all of the Confederate states ratifying those amendments as a condition of regaining US statehood, too…

Darn, I read the thread too late to have something useful to say about him being from the sovereignty movement. I saw a case recently where one of these guys claimed he didn’t need to pay his mortgage since he mailed a letter saying that he didn’t owe it. Other documents prove otherwise but his legal brief was huge and with with these really tortured writing we see above.

I also wonder what Kurt Cobain was doing with an albino and a mulatto that then had him juxtapose them with his libido mosquito.

Joe.My.God has a similar post from today with a video of Victoria Jackson declaring that President Obama’s awesome “O” logo is–get this–Communist propaganda! Even better, that kind of propaganda is just like what Hitler did! And it looks like the Pepsi symbol. (Shhh! Don’t tell her that the Pepsi symbol is capitalist!)

I can’t fucking wait for Romney (Teh Mormon) to win the Republican presidential nomination. Teabaggers like Epperly and Jackson are going to be so depressed when that happens.

Do these sovereign types vote in the first place? Why would they contribute to the government they see as illegitimate.

Honestly, until today I thought there couldn’t be anything scarier in the world than Christian Dominionist, but after googling and reading about these loonies I just wanted go and hide under the duvet for the rest of the millennium.

People interested in the Sovereign Citizen Movement – including comments from some real live “Sov’runs” – might want to check out the site Quatloos. They’ve got a lot on those guys, as well as Tax Protesters (a closely-overlapping but not entirely identical group.)

For those not familiar, an example of their kind of thinking is that there are certain types of gold fringe on the US flag in a courtroom that supposedly cause the proceedings to become a Maratime Case, and therefore covered by a different branch of law. Flag fringe, yep.
Or that a very specific pattern of capitalization and word patterns on name and address will somehow release the individual from having to follow the dictates of the federal government. Sometimes includes color of ink to be used, too.
Very strange people.

For those not familiar, an example of their kind of thinking is that there are certain types of gold fringe on the US flag in a courtroom that supposedly cause the proceedings to become a Maratime Case, and therefore covered by a different branch of law. Flag fringe, yep.

Back when I was working for a federal land management agency that is in charge of large swathes of Alaska, I was told that attitudes there were 20 years behind the Lower 48. At the time I found it to be true: the environmental movement hadn’t arrived yet, and the idea of reserving any place from human entry & use was hotly disputed. Judging by this lawsuit, the gap seems to have widened. I’m thinking it’s more like 50 years now.

As the Fourteenth Amendment is only a grant of “Civil Rights” and not a grant of “Political Rights,” Barack Hussein Obama II does not have any “Political Rights” under any provision of the United States Constitution to hold any Public Office of the United States.

P.S. In other news I see we have that nice chap who likes guns back again. I predict massive thread derail in 5…4…3…2…

HAHA Just note that I didn’t start it and I, mostly, plan to keep it to myself this time.

Frankly I find the whole sovereign movement to be very interesting. Not in a “Oh my they certainly have a pont” way. But more in a “how can anyone be this nuts, way.”

I actually saw a lot of the paper terrorism that these nutballs like to file when I was working around the courts in Houston. Including one that said the Mars rover was tresspassing on his claim on Mars and wanted NASA to cease and desist. That one sounds funny but a lot of other suits cost the victim thousands of dollars to resolve, even if they are completely bogus. They can sue the SC person who filed it but good luck getting any money from those idiots

It is hard for me to tell if they’re actualy crazy or if there is something else involved. Many of the ones who have shot it out with the cops have essentially thrown their lives away over paranoid fantasies and straw men. What is it makes them go to that extreme? Why do they feel they have that right and what is it that causes them to ignore the law as written, the societal norms surrounding them and objective reality.

For those not familiar, an example of their kind of thinking is that there are certain types of gold fringe on the US flag in a courtroom that supposedly cause the proceedings to become a Maratime Case, and therefore covered by a different branch of law. Flag fringe, yep.

Or that a very specific pattern of capitalization and word patterns on name and address will somehow release the individual from having to follow the dictates of the federal government. Sometimes includes color of ink to be used, too.

Rather reminds me of scriptural literalism. Or PUAs who think that if they just speak the right words and perform the right actions, the woman must grant them access to Teh Poosay.

For all the worship these idiots give the Founding Fathers do they actually not remember what their rallying cry was for the revolution?

Once you start going down the sovereign citizen rabbithole, you quickly realize that these are people who start with whatever premise they want and work background to come up with whatever bullshit justification they can imagine. Consistently and historical accuracy are not relevant to their mindset.

e.g., “I don’t want to pay income tax, therefore, there is some magical formula that I can use to declare myself immune from taxation.” or “I’m really upset that these wimmin and darkies are able to vote and hold office, therefore, the constitutional amendments that are used to justify their rights must be invalid.”

So you’re saying no-one ever sucessfully defends themselves or their family using a gun?

No, he’s saying that the gun is just, if not more likely, to hit a family member by accident. That is what statitical (versus anecdotatal) evidence says. After all, nobody in a gun magazine wants to admit he shot his wife coming back from the bathroom when he was drunk. But it happens.

I never heard or read the term “mulatto” until I was in college, when I watched a Woody Allen movie in which he claimed to be one. After I looked it up, I was amazed to think that the term was still expected to be in use in the year 3000 (or whenever Sleeper was set).

No, he’s saying that the gun is just, if not more likely, to hit a family member by accident.

Except for the ones that don’t. Keep in mind, I don’t have any kids at my house and I am currently single. If I had kids my opinion would certainly be different.

That is what statitical (versus anecdotatal) evidence says.

Actually the statistical evidence says that if you own a gun you are more likely to shoot a member of your household with it than anyone else. They don’t say that using a gun to defend yourself or your family from an intruder you are more likely to hit a family member than the intruder.

After all, nobody in a gun magazine wants to admit he shot his wife coming back from the bathroom when he was drunk. But it happens.

Actually that is something that gun owners I know do discuss quite a bit. Firearms and alcohol never mix. I appreciate the concern but I doubt you have read any gun magazines. Don’t feel bad, I haven’t either. I also doubt you have ever discussed any of this with anyone who actually owns a gun.

Does it make me a bad person if I snicker while imagining just how depressed quarter-wits like this Epperly fellow would be if Romney got the nomination? And more so if I start imaging them making suicide threats?

So you don’t like my position then I should just be banned? If I disagree with you I should be banned. If you want to have a real dission about guns, I am perfectly happy to do so. But seems that what I am hearing is something like this

“Guns are BAD!!!!!!, MOTHERFUCKER!!!”

“Uh…I disagree.”

“Well then you’re banned.”

I willingly admit that some of the statements in the previous thread could certainly have been stated better. But, I don’t think I am being inane or tedious(then again whoever is willing to admit it). The previous thread had several hundred responses, many of them direct at me. So I suspect that some of you were at least slightly interested and I would say had fun replying. Otherwise why did it go on so long?

It’s kinda funny but this reminds me of what happens when I mention I don’t believe in God. The shocked, superior attitude, the immediate dismissal, the unwillingness to even consider my position, the accusations that I am lying or just being difficult.

One final thought though. It may not be good to mock these people. It is fine to go hahaha at the, but remember they are out there, they are heavily armed and, even worse, they know how to file a lawsuit. Although I am the only one on here dumb enough to use my real name.

So basically Epperly is one part racist, one part birther, and stupid all over?

Before the [purported] ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment

Isn’t funny how racist dingleberries always feel that they have the authority to edit inconvenient history?

Having trouble with an amendment to the Constitution that doesn’t gel with your rabid xenophobia? Simple; just claim that the amendment in question never really happened, and that all historical documents/historians/textbooks that seem to indicate otherwise are actually all part of a nazi/commie/atheist/muslim plot.

You started the same conversation people already had with you. It was a long one and repeating it would be tedious.

No. go back and read the thread. I didn’t start it. Although it probably would have been wiser not to rise to Brownian’s provocation. But, had my initial comment come from anyone else, it wouldn’t have raised much of an eyebrow.

Epperly does come across as a bit odd, it is true, but I wonder if he is actually suffering from any personality disorder or is simply really, really bigoted.

But, he’s not really a birther, he’s worse. He is saying that because Mr. Obama is african American he is not entitled to the same constitutional protections as a caucasian would be.

You are right; that is worse. However, he does seem to be adapting birther arguments and approaching things from a slightly different angle – rather than trying to claim that Obama wasn’t born in the US and so is not a ‘natural born citizen’, he is trying to assert that no African American can ever be considered a ‘natural born citizen’ for the purposes of constitutional rights and so can never become President – a frankly jaw-dropping piece of poisonous racist rhetoric, even by the standards of the modern American religious Right.

So rather than claiming that Obama was born in the ‘wrong’ country, Epperly is showing his 100% proof bigotry be trying to assert that Obama was born into the the ‘wrong’ racial group – same ‘logic’, different details.

Eric Hoag, take your fanaticism and bother somebody else somewhere else. Nobody is interesting in discussing penis substitutes with you. Or to put it in plain, simple terms, SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT YOUR BANG-BANGS!

Among the various subjects of energetic sovereign citizen revisionism, perhaps none is more important than the 14th Amendment. Ratified in 1868, the Amendment had several aims, including the guaranteeing of United States citizenship for the ex-slaves. But to sovereign citizens it did much more; they claim that before its ratification, virtually no one was a “citizen of the United States.” One would previously have been a citizen of the republic of Ohio or of some other state; only residents of Washington, D.C., or federal territories were citizens of the United States. The 14th Amendment created an entirely new class of citizens, they argue, one that anybody, theoretically, could voluntarily join.

But to become a citizen of the United States was to willingly subject oneself to the complete authority of the federal and state governments; clearly, no one would want to do this. The government, therefore, tricked people into entering into its jurisdiction and that of the “corporate” state government by having them sign contracts with it. The trick was that people did not even realize they were signing contracts: these included items like Social Security cards, drivers’ licenses, car registrations, wedding licenses or even, as Terry Nichols noted, hunting licenses and zip codes.

Epperly does come across as a bit odd, it is true, but I wonder if he is actually suffering from any personality disorder or is simply really, really bigoted.

Actually it is a good question. I suspect there is also some strange psychology at work with them.

Though, I actually met a few of them back in the 90’s at the Federal courthouse in Houston. Aside from the nutty patches they had on they wouldn’t have really stood out in a crowd.

What’s really odd is that their beliefs don’t always contain a racist element. Some of them believe that anyone who emigrated after a certain event are not sovereign citizens(usually the end of the Civil War). For some of them, it has nothing to do with race. A fact that can be seen by the existence of several African American sovereign citizen groups. But I suspect that those folks are largely attracted to the Tax-Protester side of the sovereigns.

All in all, I think they are a strange and interesting group. But, best observed from a bunker with a large telescope.

Ooh—100+ comments in, and no one has mentioned what appears to me to be the simplest (though not most important or ugliest) problem with the Objection that this Epperly moron has filed: it’s four years late.

Epperly is arguing that Obama was not qualified to be on Alaska’s ballot for President. His evidence includes copies of the official nominating documents from the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, signed by Convention chair Nancy Pelosi and all.

Never mind the Civil War, the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, and all that—this guy’s case collapses based on the fact that the 2008 election has already been run.

I’ve never been able to understand why candidacy for the US presidency is restricted to people born in the USA. Surely you are cheating yourselves of some potentially good candidates, aren’t you?

I suspect that way back when it had a lot to do with European nobility. This passage pretty much eliminated all of them from leadership roles in the states with one fell swoop. You can probably find a better answer in the Federalist papers or the debates surrounding the constitution.

Epperley is a moron – he just can’t get anything at all right. Obama’s a natural born citizen by virtue of many of the tests. Since his mother was a US citizen who had resided in the USA for more than 5 years, Obama would be a natural born citizen regardless of where he was born. Since Obama was actually born in Hawaii after admission of the Territory to the Union, Obama is a natural born citizen by virtue of Jus Terra which would apply regardless of the citizenship of his parents. Personally I’d like to see the child of illegal immigrants to the USA (preferably Mexican) make it to president – after all, those folks are all natural born citizens of the USA and hopefully the “birthers” will be so upset they’ll die of nervousness.

He seems to have missed the fact that non-whites of all types were allowed to become citizens even before the 14th amendment. I don’t know the ins and outs of slave laws before it, but I do know that not all blacks were slaves. Was there some nebulous “free blacks” legal status that said they weren’t slaves but also not citizens? I suppose so, but that just doesn’t make sense to me.

I wonder if the percent of people who “think” like Epperly are more common now or is the news of them more easily disseminated or found now the traditional News Organizations seem to have lost their monopoly on what is news?
Have there not always been “functional schizophrenics” seen at local city counsels and the odd protest and street corners?
How does the internet enter in to it. Does it allow widely separated people who may have paranoid thoughts and feelings learn about others who have similar thoughts? The arizona shooter had a web site that was full of this kind of delusional crap. How much of a danger sign is it? If it is a danger sign what is it a danger sign of?
The lone gunman can it seems do a considerable lot of damage to individuals and as a result to civil liberties generally.
funny though it is that some one can think like that and act on it but it is unsettling just the same.
owning and keeping arms is OK I guess but they are also a highly valued and sought after burglar item readily sold for above market value unlike most items stolen.

There was some discussion about removing the native born citizen requirement when Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor of California. The GOP saw him as a rising star, but that ended when he moved to the center on environmental and social issues.

And if Epperly really is a member of the Sovereign Citizen group in Alaska, then he probably believes that the Alaskan state government is a puppet state of Communist Russia.

*snort!*

Shouldn’t he be railing against the upcoming Russian presidential election instead Obama, then?

I mean, Putin is running for president again and is expected to win by a wide margin. That’s some shady shit right there. Maybe we could just turn this Epperly chap around* and point his idiocy ire at a whole different continent.

In fact, there used to be a lot of suspicion that the Republicans were going to propose altering it so that Arnie could run for Pres after his wildly successful term as governor of California. Funny that you don’t hear much about that anymore.

… in most of Alaska, all you can see from any part of your property is a whole lot more Alaska.

No fucking way. I had no idea!

It was a joke, you know. Because that’s pretty much what Sarah Palin said… never mind.

*sigh*

Anyway, I started reading some stuff on the Sovereign Citizen movement*, which lead me down the rabbit hole to the Christian Identity movement and then I just couldn’t handle it anymore. I had to stop ‘cos, oh my ever lovin’ fuck, that shit is scary.

*Thanks to Ms Daisy Cutter’s linky, I found this charming article on Crooks and Liars from a couple of weeks ago. You’ll never guess which Republican presidential hopeful has ties to the Sovereign Citizen movement! Go ahead, guess! I’ll give you a hint: his name rhymes with Pon Raul.

These Sovereign citizen movement people are mostly Ex-Cons who don’t want to have to worry about nagging little things like firearms background checks, IRS forms and other unhappy things.
Many of them also consider that there exist no amendments after the 10th, thus eliminating the 11th through 27th amendments, but most especially the 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th amendments.

I thought Christian IDentity was well known in these parts… yeah, it’s some pretty scary shit. And I think the only thing that keeps them in check is fear of retaliation; seriously, it’s true that those of us who are brown or black don’t have souls, but *it’s also true of white people*. I’m pretty sure they think anything they can do to us is just…

Enough of them have plead guilty to various crimes* to suggest that they know that legally they don’t have a leg to stand on. It would be a juvenile justification for their actions, if they weren’t so fucking dangerous (death threats to elected officials/judges, attacking cops, stuff like that).

But I would be wary of just saying these people are just a bunch of ex-cons who want guns. From what I’ve seen, the FBI has classified these people as domestic terrorists. (Besides, it’s easy enough to bypass gun regulations without even declaring yourself “sovereign”.)

rutee:

I thought Christian IDentity was well known in these parts… yeah, it’s some pretty scary shit.

I have a passing familiarity with it (and its influence on various white supremacist groups), but I really didn’t know any details.

I’ve never been able to understand why candidacy for the US presidency is restricted to people born in the USA.

Supposedly, the idea was that there was a real fear that a demogogue who secretly owed allegiance to England or some other foreign power would get himself elected in order to undermine the independence of the US and steer it under the control of some established power.

The real reason, I’m informed, was that Jefferson and his allies wanted to make sure Alexander Hamilton would never be president.

Sorry, wasn’t my intention to paint these people as harmless wackos. They’re trouble, and avoiding gun laws and evading taxes are just the beginning. The FBI are right to be concerned.

See also: the Hutaree militia, or Militia Movement in general.
The theme they follow goes all the way back to the Posse Comitatus movement of the late 70s. I dislike using absolutes, but all of the ones I’ve encountered or read about were also heavily into white racism/white supremacism/separatism.

Many of them also consider that there exist no amendments after the 10th, thus eliminating the 11th through 27th amendments,

So that means that Prohibition never happened? But wait, it was never repealed, so it’s still the law. But it couldn’t be repealed, because it never happened, but if it wasn’t repealed it’s still in effect but… but… but….

I wonder if the percent of people who “think” like Epperly are more common now or is the news of them more easily disseminated or found now the traditional News Organizations seem to have lost their monopoly on what is news?

The latter. They’ve been around since the Civil War, at least. The Series of Tubes™ gives them more visibility and makes it easier for them to connect with one another.

Well, aside from the overt racism, is the “sovereign citizen” thing even that much stupider than the California State University system’s pretense that they aren’t flagrantly violating the provision in their constitution that residents will never be charged tuition by calling the $3500+/semester full-time tuition a “state university fee?”

noahhopson-walker @114: I thought so too, but I’ve just read part of the majority decision in Scott v. Sandford (available here), and it held that descendants of Africans brought into the US as slaves could never become US citizens, even if they were born free. That would indeed preclude the vast majority of African Americans from being citizens if it hadn’t been overruled by the 14th Amendment – but ironically Obama, who is not a descendant of people brought into the US as slaves, is not covered by that provision.

The real reason, I’m informed, was that Jefferson and his allies wanted to make sure Alexander Hamilton would never be president.

Under the US Constitution, Alexander Hamilton would have been eligible for the Presidency. Article 2, section 5 of the Constitution says, emphasis added:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Hamilton certainly met that requirement.

It was Chief Justice Roger Taney who decreed in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), that no black person could be a citizen, including not only emancipated slaves but also blacks who had never been enslaved. The other justices said that a slave did not have standing to bring a suit against his master. If Taney had just limited himself to that, Dred Scott would not have been a significant case.

Germany has this kind of movement too, calling itself Provisional Reich Government

They claim the current government of Germany is illegitimate and have tried to refuse paying taxes on occasion, and some of the groups also have ties to Neo-Nazi groups. One such group tried to run for the state elections of Hamburg, garnering a whopping 858 out of 1.5m cast votes.

Yeesh! What a pathetic hateful moonbat loon that Gordon Warren Epperly seems to be! Even if what he so hair-splittingly argues was true – and it isn’t – why would anyone actually want to argue that unless they were racist?

It was Chief Justice Roger Taney who decreed in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), that no black person could be a citizen, including not only emancipated slaves but also blacks who had never been enslaved.

…wat…

HOW THE HECK DID I LEARN NOTHING FROM SCHOOL EXCEPT HOW TO SPELL ‘DRED SCOTT’ RRRGH

Well, you never were (I don’t think? Who are you exactly?), so it’s ahead.

Just a pseudo-regular who’s been around Pharyngula for about 3 years but changed nym’s when the switch to FTB happened (and currently spends more time on the Facebook group than commenting here), and usually makes a point of reading your contributions but is a bit insulted by being personally attacked just for expressing exasperation at seeing yet another thread derailed by our little troll. Oh well. At least now I know to ignore you.